- From: Azamat <abdoul@cytanet.com.cy>
- Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 11:50:25 +0300
- To: "ONTAC-WG General Discussion" <ontac-forum@colab.cim3.net>
- Cc: "Chris Menzel" <cmenzel@tamu.edu>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
Chris, If violating the basic laws of reasoning were punishable, you could risk a life sentence. See my final comments below. Take care, Azamat ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Menzel" <cmenzel@tamu.edu> To: "ONTAC-WG General Discussion" <> Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>; <editor@content-wire.com> Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2006 9:58 PM Subject: Re: [ontac-forum] Semantics and Ontology and Semiotics > > On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 05:07:18PM +0300, Azamat wrote: >> Chris's sophistries are more shocking. There is a rather clear >> conditional statement, with the plain vanilla meaning: >> >> <AA> the whole enterprise of semantic technology is an otiose >> undertaking and expansive academic mystification without understanding >> of the nature of meaning, its critical dimensions, mechanisms and >> algorithms of representation in computable forms. > > The word "conditional" appears to have a meaning for you that it doesn't > have for anyone else; this makes for difficult communication. > Typically, the conditionality of a claim is made explict by the word > "if" or the like, or by the use of the subjunctive mood. By contrast, > you use the straightforwardly declarative "is" to characterize "the > whole enterprise of semantic technology" as "an otiose undertaking <blah > blah blah>". That you find floating somewhere in this baldly > declarative statement a "clear conditional" is as mystifying and bizarre > as those who claim to see images of the Virgin burnt into their morning > tortillas. This is an example of what is usually designated as 'ridiculous' and 'nonsensical'. Just another sample of defective forms of reasoning: verbal fallacy, putting your perverted interpretation. As you must know, conditional clauses are introduced by the following conjunctions: if, unless, except, whether, provided that, so long as, etc. See the intended structure of the sentence: {The main clause} [the whole enterprise of semantic technology is an otiose undertaking and expansive academic mystification] without {condition} [understanding of the nature of meaning, its critical dimensions, mechanisms and algorithms of representation in computable forms]. Look up Webster's dictionary just to find out that 'without' has a sense of conjunctions 'unless', 'except on the condition that'. The law-abiding citizens could easily read it like this: If no [understanding of the nature of meaning, its critical dimensions, mechanisms and algorithms of representation in computable forms], then [the whole enterprise of semantic technology is an otiose undertaking and expansive academic mystification]. 'Understanding the nature of meaning...' is here a condition, precondition, stipulation, provision, or assumption, that which must exists for something else to be, that on which rests the effect (validity, truth) of something else. Moreover, it is a necesary condition for 'the building of semantic technology', like as 'the ill will may be a condition for your confusing reasoning'. Please no more of your mind-abusing 'offences', i had enough of your unmeaning und unprofitable talk.
Received on Monday, 29 May 2006 08:50:52 UTC